Calling for an independent review of the PFA is all well and good but Gordon Taylor's open letter does not go far enough.

He says the PFA has 'taken the time to think carefully about what is in the best interests of our organisation and our members'.

If he really wants to act in the best interests of his members, he should at the very least have called an election. The only person this review process serves is Gordon Taylor. All he has done is buy himself more time at the top of his organisation.

Gordon Taylor calling for an independent review of the PFA just gives him more time at the top

Share this article

Share

He says in his letter that he is happy to defend the PFA's record in areas including mental health, diversity and player welfare. I challenge you to find one former player or family member affected by dementia who is satisfied with what their union boss has done on this issue.

If he is indeed adamant that criticism should be addressed head on, then why not stand for re-election and let his members be the judge?

There is no guarantee that a review will achieve the modernisation that this organisation badly needs.

We do not know who the independent QC will be or how they will be chosen.

Why doesn't the chief executive stand for re-election and let his members be the judge?

Most concerning is the section of Taylor's letter which reads: 'We will work closely with both the board of trustees and management committee to finalise the parameters and timeline of the review.'

How can this review be truly independent if Taylor himself has input into what it can look at?

Reviews are expensive and can take several years to complete. Even when it does finally report, it may not result in an election.

Until Gordon Taylor is able to be challenged in an open and democratic election, there is little hope of change.